NEW YORK | One World Trade Center | 1,776' Pinnacle / 1,373' Roof | 108 FLOORS

[eleven=11]

the spire/antenna is gonna be fine. 97% will never even see it.
people on this web site are the only people who will ever notice it.
I think 99% dont care.
Now I do care , but it looks fine to me.
I like the trees and the plaza and all the glass
the new train depot/piece of art is what most everyone will be taking pics of.
and all the trees!
All the good emotion of seeing the Tower finished is more important.

[NYC=WTC]

I think David Childs and engineers around the world can make a alternate design for the fiberglass radome cover. If the base cladding material was redesigned, then certainly the spire can be redesigned too. Whats the difference between the base redesign situation and the spire redesign situation?

[Otie]

You need to find a material that is transparent to radio waves.

[NYC=WTC]

I think the situation all comes down to cost. An alternate design might be feasible, but it will probably be double the cost of the original design. So, some way the cost has to come down for Durst to accept an alternative and knowing him he would not want a penny over the original design cost. Durst's team mentioned that pieces of the fiberglass radome cover could break because of ice and it would be "mission impossible," to fix it. So why not use a diffent material then? :shrug:

[CitySkyline]

I can only imagine the media's reaction when the CTBUH (most likely) rules this as an antenna, demoting the building's official height. Durst and the PA are gonna have one hell of a PR nightmare to deal with.

You know, based strictly on their own rules, there's a strong possibility that the CTBUH will rule this to be a spire.

I was reviewing this page:

http://www.ctbuh.org/News/GlobalTallNews/PR_120510_OneWorldTradeCenterHeight/tabid/3293/language/en-GB/Default.aspx

and here are some key points:

1. A spire is something that is included in the design of the building by the architect. An antenna is usually NOT designed by the architect.

(In this case, the "stick" was part of the original architectural design.)

2. A spire is something that won't be growing or shrinking in the future; it's a fixed size. An antenna might be replaced in later years, resulting in something taller, fatter, skinnier, etc. than what was originally there (See 4 Times Square.)

(In this case, the "stick" going up is a fixed height and isn't going to ever be changed.)

Based on this, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the CTBUH declares this as a spire.

BUT, yes, there is a chance they won't. For issue #1, it's true that the architect designed the COVERED stick. I highly doubt the architect designed the inner metal stick that is now going up (I'm sure the engineers designed that.) So, based on that, I could see the CTBUH declare this wasn't an architectural part of the building.

Obviously, we'll need to wait and see. But, I don't think it's that cut-n-dried. :shrug:

The CTBUH could use #1 and #2 to defend their decision, if they decide to call it a spire.

(You'll notice that the CTBUH makes no mention on what a stick looks like; just because something LOOKS like an antenna isn't a reason to declare it as an antenna, eg, see BofA.)

[pico44]

Great summary of the value engineering (or whatever the hell it is) that took place. The faceted spire casing was the best part of Childs' design, and that tapered base with its "prismatic glass" created some dynamism in building that was otherwise bunkerlike and static. IMO, it's a pretty big indictment of David Childs not only that he failed to execute those two elements, but also that, without them, the design loses most of its merit.

That said, I don't think the antenna is that bad. I think the transparency of its underlying structure is actually kinda beautiful. But it's totally inappropriate for this design. On a Richard Rogers building, though, (maybe even 175 Greenwich Street?) it might not look out of place...

This thread is doing very well without your trolling. Thanks though.

[NYC=WTC]

So if the CTBUH declares the antennae to not be a spire, will Durst have to cover the antennae with the fiberglass radome or alternative design?

[NYguy]

^ As I said earlier, it doesn't matter to Durst one way or the other. They're not in it to make the building a certain height.


I think David Childs and engineers around the world can make a alternate design for the fiberglass radome cover. If the base cladding material was redesigned, then certainly the spire can be redesigned too. Whats the difference between the base redesign situation and the spire redesign situation?

It's not a matter of the architects making an alternate design, it's a case of Durst saving money and probably future maintenance costs associated with any covering. Of course if they honestly wanted to go ahead with a spire design around the antenna, they could have gone to the original option which was for an "open" design. Forget about the "maintenance" and "microwave" bs stories. The covering was originally introduced to "protect" the antenna. But they could have gone back to the original proposal of an open "lattice" spire which was to have been designed by Kenneth Snelson along with Childs.


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/141925554/large.jpg



Skellig2008 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/15546071@N04/8268877264/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8496/8268877264_a6f8598265_b.jpg



http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8204/8268881666_7b0f06a51f_b.jpg



http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8061/8268880872_76af6a9568_b.jpg



http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8340/8176974079_1bd7c77e50_b.jpg



wavz13 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/wavz13/8267483783/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8352/8267483783_d3e35357cd_b.jpg

[NYC=WTC]

So antennae it is, live or die with it. :(

[Dense_Electric]

Alright, I'm disappointed about the lack of radome clading as much as any of you, but you know one thing that's not going to improve the situation? Bitching and moaning about it on an internet forum. At this point, it is what it is, make peace with it.

EDIT: Furthermore, we won't know if it's officially an antenna or a spire until CTBUH calls it. You can personally consider it whatever you'd like, but you don't get to decide how they're going to rule.

[ThatOneGuy]

Holy hell, are you people still arguing about the spire?

[aquablue]

With the exception of the changes to the mast, I am happy with all the other changes Durst has made. I couldn't really care less about the plaza thing. The terrace is ok with me and its probably more secure than the previous design. Let's keep in mind, the wounds of 9-11 are still pretty fresh, relatively speaking. It is very likely that the WTC will be attacked again. It won't be an attempt at bringing the tower down, but it will be meant to scare people and rob them of their peace of mind. It's not a question of if, but when.

Wow, what a scary prediction.

[mheadroom]

You need to find a material that is transparent to radio waves.

I thought the point of the communications ring was not have to load up communications equipment within the spire. If you can put dishes on the ring, why does the enclosure need to be radio transparent?

[Otie]

^If you folks think the mast is aesthetically unpleasant by itself, then reserve your complains to yourselves, this thing will eventually be filled with antennas and other broadcast equipment attached to the upper sections of the mast. The comm platform ring will house only microwave drums, whip antennas and similar dishes, while the rest of emissive broadcast equipment will go higher up.

[Otie]

Of course if they honestly wanted to go ahead with a spire design around the antenna, they could have gone to the original option which was for an "open" design. Forget about the "maintenance" and "microwave" bs stories. The covering was originally introduced to "protect" the antenna. But they could have gone back to the original proposal of an open "lattice" spire which was to have been designed by Kenneth Snelson along with Childs.


http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/141925554/large.jpg


Snelson was forced by Schlaich Bergerman to scrap that idea, the lattice steel included in his original design had the problem that the material was by nature reflective to the electromagnetic spectrum, meaning that it blocked any radio wave coming from the broadcast equipment.

[mrnyc]

^ wait a minute, i thought it was value engineered supposedly because it was too hard to take care of? this comment above suggests that design did not work. thats a very different thing. are we going under a false assumption they just wanted to save $?

[CCs77]

BUT, yes, there is a chance they won't. For issue #1, it's true that the architect designed the COVERED stick. I highly doubt the architect designed the inner metal stick that is now going up (I'm sure the engineers designed that.) So, based on that, I could see the CTBUH declare this wasn't an architectural part of the building.



The architects should design the entire spire, the engineers makes the calculous and make some recomendations. But if the architect wants it to look some way, he has to design the whole thing, not just the cover. Obviuosly it was design with the cover in mind, and it is not the same. Certainly, if the architects would want a coverless spire, they would design it differently.

[Otie]

^lol at the comment, we all have no idea how complex the mast is by itself and all the challenges it required to get what we see now, the german engineers contracted made an EXTRAORDINARY work here, for instance they managed to reduce the vertical deflection point by max 0.5 degrees!!!! You folks need to also look up at all the hard work engineers have made with this project.

Can't imagine how this thing would have ended if the mast were left in charge to a sculptor...

[NYC GUY]

NYC will have the tallest in America anyway with the Nordstrom tower at 1550' possibly higher. By the way it looks like are dissembling the south crane.

[06hdfxdwg]

What you have right now is a mast. It's been designed,ordered,delivered and has started to be boomed up onto the structure,so deal with it. I swear,sometimes it's like listening to a bunch of little kids who didn't get that horse for Christmas. Say what you want about symbolism but nobody really cared that the Antenna mast on the old North Tower wasn't counted toward the height of the building. It is what it is and theres nothing you can do about it,so get past it already and just watch the damn thing go up. Geezus,enough already.

[PhillyToNYC]

What you have right now is a mast. It's been designed,ordered,delivered and has started to be boomed up onto the structure,so deal with it. I swear,sometimes it's like listening to a bunch of little kids who didn't get that horse for Christmas. Say what you want about symbolism but nobody really cared that the Antenna mast on the old North Tower wasn't counted toward the height of the building. It is what it is and theres nothing you can do about it,so get past it already and just watch the damn thing go up. Geezus,enough already.

This is the exact same attitude that I have. Aren't we lucky enough to at least have a new building at the site? Just makes me think how much people on this forum think that complaining about something will make it actually happen. I have news for you, Durst is cheap, and is making some cuts on the building to save prices. Be happy that it's the spire, and not the restaurant or the observation decks.

[ThatOneGuy]

The constant media referencing of the sensationalist '1776' foot height made it stick in too many Americans' minds.

[Otie]

Truth is the thing will by 1797.67' to the tip.

[PMadFlyer]

According to IrishInNYC, the actual first section will be lifted on Tuesday December 18th in a tandem lift directly from the trailer to the final location. The piece they lifted yesterday will be kept on top of the platform for now and will wait for the first section. The concrete curb that will hold the antenna is being poured tomorrow.

Original post (http://wirednewyork.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3672&page=861)

[Downburst]

Mine, taken yesterday:

http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Meteomaster/Buildings/NewYorkCity/wtc_small.jpg

Uncovering the base:
http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Meteomaster/Buildings/NewYorkCity/base_bits.jpg

Mast pieces:
http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Meteomaster/Buildings/NewYorkCity/spire_bits.jpg

http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Meteomaster/Buildings/NewYorkCity/wtc_another_angle_small.jpg

http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Meteomaster/Buildings/NewYorkCity/wtc_and_wfc_small.jpg

With 4:
http://www.majhost.com/gallery/Meteomaster/Buildings/NewYorkCity/1_and_4.jpg

[JayPro]

Truth is the thing will by 1797.67' to the tip.

This is news....So now we're talking 10 and a whisker over one half feet higher than what's been advertized at great length...FTR *another* nugget of numerological tripe symbolism that--as I would assume most of us know full-well--refers to what happened in Philadelphia; not New York...but who pays any attention to itsy-bitsy, utterly trivial details, like that? ;)

The whole kit n' kaboodle rounds up all the easier to 1,800'. That's my point.

[deepen915]

NYC will have the tallest in America anyway with the Nordstrom tower at 1550' possibly higher. By the way it looks like are dissembling the south crane.

what Nordstrom Tower? HUH?

[Totojuice]

what Nordstrom Tower? HUH?

227 West 57th..... supposed to be 1550 ft

[NYguy]

Alright, I'm disappointed about the lack of radome clading as much as any of you, but you know one thing that's not going to improve the situation? Bitching and moaning about it on an internet forum. At this point, it is what it is, make peace with it.

EDIT: Furthermore, we won't know if it's officially an antenna or a spire until CTBUH calls it. You can personally consider it whatever you'd like, but you don't get to decide how they're going to rule.

Holy hell, are you people still arguing about the spire?

^If you folks think the mast is aesthetically unpleasant by itself, then reserve your complains to yourselves, this thing will eventually be filled with antennas and other broadcast equipment attached to the upper sections of the mast. The comm platform ring will house only microwave drums, whip antennas and similar dishes, while the rest of emissive broadcast equipment will go higher up.

What you have right now is a mast. It's been designed,ordered,delivered and has started to be boomed up onto the structure,so deal with it. I swear,sometimes it's like listening to a bunch of little kids who didn't get that horse for Christmas. Say what you want about symbolism but nobody really cared that the Antenna mast on the old North Tower wasn't counted toward the height of the building. It is what it is and theres nothing you can do about it,so get past it already and just watch the damn thing go up. Geezus,enough already.


I'll say this for you people who don't want to read anything negative about the mast going up: GET OVER IT.

It's the only thing rising on the tower now, and if you don't want to view people's opinions of it, then move on. Everyone else will continue to voice their like or displeasure of it, and if you don't particularly agree with it, then don't. This isn't the only skyscraper going up in the world, and it certainly won't be the only one immune to criticism, no matter how many feelings it hurts. You will find that sometimes in life, there is room and opening for criticism. It's not all cheering. I hope that's a lesson learned.


As for my opinion, the antenna should have been hidden, the way it was planned. The building was intended to have a spire - not an antenna. The broadcasters came onto the project after the fact. David Childs had a lengthy battle with Libeskind over the spire, the one constant the building had to have in any design. Now, how some of you can't grasp that, I no longer care. But I think the entire affair over the spire is a disgrace, especially when it calls the building's height into question, which shouldn't even be on the table. This would NEVER have been allowed to happen 5 years ago, but as I said earlier, people have already forgotten the significance of this rebuilding, and there will be no outrage.

The best thing the CTBUH could do for this building is to rule the mast an antenna, and not a spire. Because then the design won't be called into question, it would just be an antenna, same as was on top of the original complex - something hardly anyone noticed or cared about because it wasn't a reflection on the design, and wasn't meant to be. In effect, it didn't exist.

http://www.ctbuh.org/TallBuildings/HeightStatistics/Criteria/tabid/446/language/en-US/Default.aspx

1. Height to Architectural Top
Height is measured from the level of the lowest, significant, open-air, pedestrian entrance to the architectural top of the building, including spires, but not including antennae, signage, flag poles or other functional-technical equipment.




Larry Laurex (http://www.flickr.com/photos/larry_laurex/8265207699/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8224/8265207699_4455b8b590_b.jpg



nycmayorsoffice (http://www.flickr.com/photos/nycmayorsoffice/8269648549/sizes/l/in/set-72157632237010097/)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8341/8269648549_9a93a204a9_b.jpg



SjfO0lr8uuI

[-Filipe-]

:previous: and if you dislike the antenna, GET OVER IT, lets be honest, every other of your posts on here is complaining about the antenna...

[Kevin Scott Koepke]

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8066/8268994946_ecf23c6805_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/plasticfantasticphotography/8268994946/)
Titans Of New York; 12/12/12 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/plasticfantasticphotography/8268994946/) by kevin scott koepke photography (http://www.flickr.com/people/plasticfantasticphotography/), on Flickr

[599GTO]

:previous: and if you dislike the antenna, GET OVER IT, lets be honest, every other of your posts on here is complaining about the antenna...

Nope. What else is there to talk about? The (unclad) base? Snails-pace cladding? The antenna is the focus right now and it's ugly and i'll keep calling it ugly. Ugly, ugly, ugly. What a disgrace.

Thank God for Barnett. I know he will not cheapen the FUTURE TALLEST BUILDING IN NYC (and in the U.S.A.), 225 West 57th! I suppose being the 4th tallest building in the USA isn't so bad, 1 WTC. Oh fuck it -- who are we kidding, that's just embarrassing for the much hyped World Trade Center. In any case, I can't wait until 225 West 57th starts rising because we all know Barnett isn't cheap, and has higher levels of taste and civic pride unlike Durst. I am certain the new Nordstrom Tower will be stunning.

We're lucky we have so much better looking supertalls rising soon. And i'm sure the future will usher in a new wave of supertalls that will also dwarf and overshadow this cheapened 1,373ft building. Like Barnett's 1,550ft+ one! Cant wait!

[-Filipe-]

^^ last time i checked i didnt say anything about not being able to talk about it, and i never said i disagree it is ugly although i like it at night

[JayPro]

This will be my last post with respect to a discussion IMHonestO regrettably contaminated by misdirected indignation to a degree that IMHumbleO steals the joy that I--and dare I suggest anyone else on this fine message board--should otherwise derive from contributing to it.

This CTBUH--and any other organization on the planet that makes a habit of splitting hairs on what constitutes a skyscraper/supertall's final height for that matter--is completely dead to me.

I am simply of the opinion that *anything* that contributes to any *functional* aspect of the structure being considered should be included in the final height figure. Artistic/architectural intent--or lack thereof--is irrelevant AFAIC.

[599GTO]

This will be my last post with respect to this argument (or should I say oftentimes and unnecessarily ill-tempered banter amongst some of this fine message board's membership).

This CTBUH--and any other organization on the planet that makes a habit of splitting hairs on what constitutes a skyscraper/supertall's final height for that matter--is completely dead to me.

I am simply of the opinion that *anything* that contributes to any *functional* aspect of the structure being considered should be included in the final height figure. Artistic/architectural intent is irrelevant AFAIC.

Yea, let me go bolt a 3k ft antenna to the top of my house and demand my home be recognized as the tallest building in the world...

[Bill Ditnow]

What you have right now is a mast. It's been designed,ordered,delivered and has started to be boomed up onto the structure,so deal with it. I swear,sometimes it's like listening to a bunch of little kids who didn't get that horse for Christmas. Say what you want about symbolism but nobody really cared that the Antenna mast on the old North Tower wasn't counted toward the height of the building. It is what it is and theres nothing you can do about it,so get past it already and just watch the damn thing go up. Geezus,enough already.

Neither you, nor anyone else, gets to tell other people what to think, feel, or say. Some of us think the whole building is crap, not just the tawdry little toothpick of an antenna. And those of us who feel that way have every right to say it, over and over.

And it should be said, over and over, because this site has been butchered. It's a disgrace.

"Let's all fall in line and hold hands and watch the thing go up and submit ourselves to empty corporate propaganda" may be OK for you, but not for many others.

The fact that's it a done deal is irrelevant. People who screwed this up should be called out and held to account.

YOU get over it.

[VerizonTower]

Can somebody get their camera and zoom into the spire? Make sure you take a pic.

[VerizonTower]

Yea, let me go bolt a 3k ft antenna to the top of my house and demand my home be recognized as the tallest building in the world...

LOL! That's so funny!

[deepen915]

Yea, let me go bolt a 3k ft antenna to the top of my house and demand my home be recognized as the tallest building in the world...

i'm dying right now! LMFAO :laugh::laugh:

[NYC2ATX]

Good thing no one is going to let what you think make up their minds. People have a right to decide whether or not they like something, and there are many valid reasons why people do not or should not like what is taking place here. And just so you know, not every skyscraper lover loves every skyscraper. And not every thing about a loved skyscraper is loved. Let that sink in a bit.

Oh sure, I suppose it's a disappointment, and I'm not telling anyone how they should feel. Just saying how I feel. Quite honestly, my biggest issue is that I'm tired of coming to this thread and read complaint after complaint. Like I said, it can't be changed, and in time, it will be accepted. I prefer to focus on the positives, and I think it'd make all the members and visitors of the site feel better if they'd take a positive attitude as well. :tup:

Old Penn station was before my time. Didn't even know about it till i saw a cable special on it this last summer. It was beautiful. Nicer than Grand Central. If you think this newer penn station didn't ruin that area, Your kidding yourself. How the city let that happen is unbelievable. And yes, most of us don't like the new (antenna) that is replacing the original Spire.

I'm sure that 34th Street would be that much more wonderful if the original Penn Station was still there. Of course it would, but it's not, and what I said was that New York is not ruined forever because of it. And I know I'll be burned at the stake for this, but while the original Penn was a stellar example of early 20th-Century New York architecture, after strolling through today's Penn Station, I find it is a good and interesting example of Mid-century New York architecture...and when Moynihan comes to pass, it'll be even better. Again, bright sides.

[deepen915]

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8066/8268994946_ecf23c6805_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/plasticfantasticphotography/8268994946/)
Titans Of New York; 12/12/12 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/plasticfantasticphotography/8268994946/) by kevin scott koepke photography (http://www.flickr.com/people/plasticfantasticphotography/), on Flickr

the ESB looks so tiny compared to the WTC now.. it's amazing.

[AerialView]

Nope. What else is there to talk about? The (unclad) base? Snails-pace cladding? The antenna is the focus right now and it's ugly and i'll keep calling it ugly. Ugly, ugly, ugly. What a disgrace.

Thank God for Barnett. I know he will not cheapen the FUTURE TALLEST BUILDING IN NYC (and in the U.S.A.), 225 West 57th! I suppose being the 4th tallest building in the USA isn't so bad, 1 WTC. Oh fuck it -- who are we kidding, that's just embarrassing for the much hyped World Trade Center. In any case, I can't wait until 225 West 57th starts rising because we all know Barnett isn't cheap, and has higher levels of taste and civic pride unlike Durst. I am certain the new Nordstrom Tower will be stunning.

We're lucky we have so much better looking supertalls rising soon. And i'm sure the future will usher in a new wave of supertalls that will also dwarf and overshadow this cheapened 1,373ft building. Like Barnett's 1,550ft+ one! Cant wait!

I NEVER call anybody names because I have respect for others. Your opinion is your opinion. I have my personal criticisms and complaints with tower 1. I have gotten over it and always managed to shrug off other peoples criticisms. I like this tower and don't think this complex and it's memorial should be "snubbed" because of petty differences (for whatever they are).

Opinions and facts are one thing. But calling out people and branding them "trashy" is another. "TOURISTS" TOO ? Don't like tourists because they aren't programmed like you huh? A simple case of "Everybody does what I say and what I say is LAW !" STFU ! And when either you or the others here call others trolls for disagreeing and come to me and call me (or tourists) a f__king idiot because I just don't "get it" or don't agree? F__K YOU and keep on walking !

As far as Durst and the antenna is concerned, Seriously, What did you expect ? I saw a modification (Sort of) like this coming from a "mile" away! But then again, I think Durst finally saw that "Rats Tail" in the design. LOL !

From a site that was plagued with bureaucratic red tape, controversy and site of the world's most horrific terrorist attack in US history so, what did you expect? What was "promised"? Did I hear the sound of what was "expected", coming from a child? Ah expectations.

Welcome to expectationville, Population: YOU. Political Parties : Disappointment and Failure

I don't care either about the CTBUH. One World Trade Center is still worth the rebuilding effort to me NO MATTER how tall OR POPULAR any part of the city is. There will be MORE and more tourists coming to the new world trade center once finished.

By the way, I still count my HAIR as being taller. Wanna disagree with that? Know how to play ROSHAMBO ?

[TechTalkGuy]

:previous: Bravo !! http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y217/mr-fish/Miscellaneous/Bravo.gif

I just love this new tower for One WTC.
The antenna spire is full height and looks fine to me.

With all of the spires and antennas throughout Manhattan, this is fine.

As for future (taller) towers planned for Manhattan, that's to be expected.

If One WTC can surpass the Empire State Building, then any other tower can surpass this.

In NYC, the sky's the limit! :whip:

[JACKinBeantown]

:previous: Bravo !!



In NYC, the sky's the limit! :whip:

Actually 2,000 feet is the limit. And on the upper east side 495 feet is the limit, but I know what you mean. :cheers:

[luukardinho]

may I ask what the size of the footprint is.

[pico44]

I couldn't really care less about the spire/mast/antenna. The loss of typer and transparancy at the base, I do miss. Otherwise it really came out beautifully.

[Towersteve]

I couldn't really care less about the spire/mast/antenna. The loss of typer and transparancy at the base, I do miss. Otherwise it really came out beautifully.

I respectfully disagree. This building is massive but by square foot is smaller than the original towers. This deal reeked of crony capitalism and the antenna doesn't matter to you but it does matter to the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat which determines buildings height.

[AlphaCentauri]

may I ask what the size of the footprint is.

If I remember correctly, each side is 8 ft sorter than the originals, so the base is 200x200 ft. :tup:

Also just my 2 cents on the "mast." I find it highly unlikely that the CTBUH would rule the mast as not counting toward the final height, beings that it has been part of the building's design since 2003, and wasn't added after the building's completion on like the antennae of the Sears Tower or the original 1wtc.

[Dense_Electric]

I'll say this for you people who don't want to read anything negative about the mast going up: GET OVER IT.

It's the only thing rising on the tower now, and if you don't want to view people's opinions of it, then move on. Everyone else will continue to voice their like or displeasure of it, and if you don't particularly agree with it, then don't. This isn't the only skyscraper going up in the world, and it certainly won't be the only one immune to criticism, no matter how many feelings it hurts. You will find that sometimes in life, there is room and opening for criticism. It's not all cheering. I hope that's a lesson learned.


Didn't say you weren't allowed to voice your negative opinion on it, but the people bitching on about it like it's the end of the world and the people declaring it an antenna as if their opinion overrides CTBUH's need to accept it all the same. Legitimate criticism is one thing and should be encouraged. Whining is another thing entirely.

[NYguy]

:previous: and if you dislike the antenna, GET OVER IT, lets be honest, every other of your posts on here is complaining about the antenna...

As I've said before, the rest of the show is the antenna. If you don't want to talk about it, that's fine. But others do and will.


I don't care either about the CTBUH.

You may not care, but the FACT is, it's the CTBUH that gets to determine such things - not you. Ignoring facts don't make them not so.


Whining is another thing entirely.

I suppose I should ask you what whining about someone else's opinion is, but I really don't care.

Again, you people are going to have to grow up and learn to deal with criticism. Page after page of compliments on how great and amazing this building looks, the moment we get to the part of the building people may find unattractive, and you can't handle it. If you are going to let someone else's opinion ruin your outlook, then shame on you.



Wallace Flores (http://www.flickr.com/photos/wallaceflores/8271583333/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8206/8271583333_1502d44f2a_b.jpg



http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8491/8271583135_d45b001e32_b.jpg

[DesignerVoodoo]

This will be the last year 1WTC is turned into a xmas tree. I wanted to point out on building #7 on the lower left hand corner the #7 in on the facade made out of small fins, difficult to see and all of my friends have missed it in person.
http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/2001/img8619m.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/19/img8619m.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

[DesignerVoodoo]

My photo from Tuesday night. http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/5498/img8640i.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/716/img8640i.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

[NYC GUY]

Actually 2,000 feet is the limit. And on the upper east side 495 feet is the limit, but I know what you mean. :cheers:

2000 isn't the height limit you can build higher it's just that you need more permits to pass 2000. I think.

[The Pimp]

[QUOTE=NYC GUY;5938092]2000 isn't the height limit you can build higher it's just that you need more permits to pass 2000. I think.[/QUOTE)

The limit is set by the FAA (2000 feet).

[Roadcruiser1]

There is actually no height limit. The 2,000 foot thing limit is just a rumor. If you have a permit there is no limit to how high you can go. There are TV masts in the Midwest that shoot way over 2,000 feet.

[Guiltyspark]

If I remember correctly, each side is 8 ft sorter than the originals, so the base is 200x200 ft. :tup:

Also just my 2 cents on the "mast." I find it highly unlikely that the CTBUH would rule the mast as not counting toward the final height, beings that it has been part of the building's design since 2003, and wasn't added after the building's completion on like the antennae of the Sears Tower or the original 1wtc.

But you are ignoring the changed to the antenna designs since then which removed all the architectural elements. You are also ignoring CTBUH's other requirements for what constitutes a spire verses a mast.

[NYguy]

Durst was nice enough to provide this photo which Radio World Magazine has...


http://www.rwonline.com/article/a-view-from-on-high-the-first-spire-section/216832

A View From on High: The First Spire Section

by Paul McLane
12.14.2012


This spectacular photo is shared by John Lyons of the Durst Organization. It shows the first spire section going in at the new One World Trade Center on Wednesday of this week in lower Manhattan.

As many RW readers know, Lyons is assistant VP and director of broadcast communications for Durst, which operates the communications facilities atop 4 Times Square and other buildings, and will do so here.

Durst plans an installation to support FM radio and television antennas in the 408-foot spire, which will ultimately bring the building’s height to 1,776 feet, making it the tallest building in North America. And that means Lyons (who also is a past recipient of the Radio World Excellence in Engineering Award) is likely to be an even busier fella soon ... and the New York broadcast skyline is about to have a new look.



http://www.radioworld.com/Portals/0/durst_spire121412lo.jpg


Earlier, I was giving it a 50/50 chance it could be ruled either way. But I think it should be obvious now this may not be counted as a spire. Nothing will be official until the building is complete.

[JMGarcia]

IMO there's really 2 different questions here regarding the "top of the structure".

First, there's the aesthetics of the thing, and then's there's the artificial competition thing run by the CTBUH.

So, as far as the aesthetics go I have this to say. Compared to the original "top of the structure", during the day time it is a clear step backward. It does not have the required bulk/presence to finish the design of the tower properly as the original "top of the structure" did with the covering. The design of it uncovered was never intended to be seen so it's not even like any effort was put in to making it attractive. However at night it may be the equal of the original "top of the structure" if not superior depending on the quality of the LED lighting compared to the flood lighting of the original.

Now, it should be of no surprise to anyone that the majority of people on these boards treat skyscraper building as some sort of competitive sport where being #1 and winning are considered the ultimate goal. The CTBUH makes their bread and butter out of this idea.

Is the new "top of the sturcture" an antenna or a spire? Personally I don't care as long as it looks good. However the CTBUH will decide and thus appoint a "winner". It all reminds me a bit of the scoring system in figure skating and is a bit arbitrary. But, consider the following:

Compare the BofA NY to 1 WTC. BofA has been declared to have a spire.

1) Is it an antenna if it cannot broadcast? Like BofA, the "top of the structure" of 1 WTC cannot broadcast anything on its own. Something must be attached to it to do so. Does the BofA spire become an antenna if broadcasting equipment is attached to it? Does it only become an antenna once broadcasting starts?

2) Is it an antenna based on aesthetics? In other words, if it looks like an antenna then it's an antenna. Hard to say, I've seen a lot of unusual looking antennas that look nothing like an antenna. On the other hand BofA's spire looks like an antenna painted white to me, yet it's a spire.

3) Is it based on intent? Because no prior thought has/had been given to attaching broadcast equipment to BofA's spire it is a spire, yet there is thought of attaching broadcash equipment to the "top of the structure" of 1 WTC so then is it an antenna?

4) Is it based on width? There are certainly many spires considerably more slender than the "top of the structure" of 1 WTC.

What will CTBUH decide? I don't know if I much care any more than I care how how the russian judge rates that figure skater.

I do know I care that the aethestic integrity of the building has been damaged by Durstbag's decision and the PA's incentive for him to do it. Maybe the LED lighting will save it somewhat.

[Bertrice]

Forget the antenna. just leave that cool platform for an observation deck. IMO

[NewYorque]

Hi everyone :)

I'm new on the forum; but actually I've been following the posts since at least one year.
So I decided to register.
I'm French, so sorry for English mistakes.

I'm really interested in the construction of 1WTC. I wish I could go soon in NYC to admire the tower with my own eyes. Hope it will be possible soon...

Thanks for all of you who have posted so many photos of the construction. It enabled me to have precise idea about the progress.

Now, I see that the antenna is being built. First pieces are currently being lifted.

Please, do someone has an idea about when the first antenna sections will be assembled on the tower?

Thanks :)

[RockMont]

Forget the antenna. just leave that cool platform for an observation deck. IMO

That idea is a good one, but it ain't gonna happen.

[AlphaCentauri]

Please, do someone has an idea about when the first antenna sections will be assembled on the tower?

Welcome to the forum! :)

The first spire section will be put in place next Tuesday evening.

[CarlosV]

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8346/8272640831_78eda4d08c_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ceva321/8272640831/)
DSC_6446 copy (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ceva321/8272640831/) by Ceva321 (http://www.flickr.com/people/ceva321/), on Flickr

[DesignerVoodoo]

That is great shot Carlos, you really get an idea of what the end result will be. I was 8' away from that piece Tuesday night but you have no idea what it will look like until it is up there.

[WorldTradeCenter]

Wow, what a scary prediction.

I disagree, the wounds are mostly healed, for the most part. Some would even say we are "forgetting". However, I disagree that it is "very likely" to be attacked again. These structures going up are much more advanced than the structures formerly there.

[chris123678]

:previous: and if you dislike the antenna, GET OVER IT, lets be honest, every other of your posts on here is complaining about the antenna...

It's post like these that make me think that some people disregard what we had before and what we have now. We had a bulky yet beautiful spire seen from miles around that topped the building perfectly. Now we're left with this antenna being passed up as a spire which irates people like me.

Honestly, I'd wish people would stop saying get over it, they got rid of an important part of the building, something that was shoved down our throats for years by Daniel and David, and now this is what we're left with, an unappealing stick that's barley going to be visible.

[Empire state of mind]

Guess we'll just have to wait and see. Not so sure I'll like looking at it everyday but I'm thankful for the tower. It fills a void and hope for the future of lower manhattan and American dreams.

[bigreach]

Nope. What else is there to talk about? The (unclad) base? Snails-pace cladding? The antenna is the focus right now and it's ugly and i'll keep calling it ugly. Ugly, ugly, ugly. What a disgrace.

Thank God for Barnett. I know he will not cheapen the FUTURE TALLEST BUILDING IN NYC (and in the U.S.A.), 225 West 57th! I suppose being the 4th tallest building in the USA isn't so bad, 1 WTC. Oh fuck it -- who are we kidding, that's just embarrassing for the much hyped World Trade Center. In any case, I can't wait until 225 West 57th starts rising because we all know Barnett isn't cheap, and has higher levels of taste and civic pride unlike Durst. I am certain the new Nordstrom Tower will be stunning.

We're lucky we have so much better looking supertalls rising soon. And i'm sure the future will usher in a new wave of supertalls that will also dwarf and overshadow this cheapened 1,373ft building. Like Barnett's 1,550ft+ one! Cant wait!
Couldn't, say it better myself 599 GTO... I have a strong feeling th CTBUH,will be pursuaded to call this a spire, just because of all the backlash Durst has gotten,, and I wonder when they sit down to discuss it (Durst Bag and CTBUH),,, how thick, I MEAN just how thick!!!! Will this envelope of cash will be in it when he throws onto the desk of the CTBUH, to get what HE wants,, I think he's gonna pay them to refer to this as a spire... And makes some empty promise of placing the radome down the road,, OH B.S.

[TheCap'n]

I just joined today but I've been following the forum for months. All of the pics are great, and it makes for a cool digital scrapbook of the progress of the tower construction.

Like many of you, I think it's a shame that the spire/antenna no longer has the original radome appearance, but honestly, I think it's still going to look great (especially at night with the up-lighting).

For all of you that are holding onto hope that the radome covering could be added last minute...it won't be. The spire structure that you're all seeing in the recent pics is going to be what's installed, and there won't be any last-minute surprises. If it was even a possibility, the exterior sheathing would have to already be in production somewhere, and it's not.

As far as the CTBUH's designation is concerned, I hope they count the spire.

I'm surprised nobody seems to be talking about the beacon that's going to be at the top?? It's supposed to shine out in two directions (rotating) for miles.

[DesignerVoodoo]

There was an issue with something on the barge so only one piece was delivered tonight but they plan on bringing three pieces over tomorrow night. Also the truck had to back down Barclay and Washington Streets and it did seem like it went smoother than Tuesday nights delivery. I was told the deck on this piece is temporary. http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/5095/img9323f.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/100/img9323f.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us) http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/2400/img1903sa.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/259/img1903sa.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us) http://img233.imageshack.us/img233/661/img1910jd.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/233/img1910jd.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us) http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/267/img9404od.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/141/img9404od.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

[Inkoumori]

Awesome shots DesignerVoodoo!

For what it's worth, it's much better than the old antenna/spire;)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8485/8274730784_36c5032402_z.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8213/8273664619_0063d394e3_z.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfrB7iZb8o4

[Fluffybagel]

Couldn't, say it better myself 599 GTO... I have a strong feeling th CTBUH,will be pursuaded to call this a spire, just because of all the backlash Durst has gotten,, and I wonder when they sit down to discuss it (Durst Bag and CTBUH),,, how thick, I MEAN just how thick!!!! Will this envelope of cash will be in it when he throws onto the desk of the CTBUH, to get what HE wants,, I think he's gonna pay them to refer to this as a spire... And makes some empty promise of placing the radome down the road,, OH B.S.

Quite honestly, I don't even think Durst will care what the mast will be ruled as. As long as he makes money, he's fine. And that's the sad part, that the PA let a dirtbag like him "contribute" to arguably one of the most important construction projects in American history.:hell:

[hunser]

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8203/8272433561_5b8ae6fc43_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/85942376@N07/8272433561/)
Lower Manhattan (http://www.flickr.com/photos/85942376@N07/8272433561/) von Matthew Caws (http://www.flickr.com/people/85942376@N07/) auf Flickr

[Hudson11]

Awesome shots DesignerVoodoo!

For what it's worth, it's much better than the old antenna/spire;)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8485/8274730784_36c5032402_z.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8213/8273664619_0063d394e3_z.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfrB7iZb8o4

Well there was never any doubt that the North Tower's mast was an antenna. It was littered with broadcasting equipment. That's one of the main dfferences with the new 1 WTC's mast. It wont have anything attached to it, that's what the comms ring will be for.

[CityGuy87]

Are we all forgetting that Douglas Durst had once been completely against this tower being built in the first place? Just putting that back out there.

Btw, was the radome enclosure ever actually made?

[QUEENSNYMAN]

FROM: QUEENSNY121

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_5iY_XVoPw&feature=youtu.be

[NYguy]

So, as far as the aesthetics go I have this to say. Compared to the original "top of the structure", during the day time it is a clear step backward. However at night it may be the equal of the original "top of the structure" if not superior depending on the quality of the LED lighting compared to the flood lighting of the original.

Someone mentioned this earlier, but the tower will be very visibly by day to most people. The night views should be considered a bonus as a lot of towers aren't visible at night. Also, the spire was designed specifically so that the details would appear visble at night as well.

http://www.wtc.com/about/freedom-tower/1-world-trade-center-design

The crown of 1 World Trade Center is the 408-foot antenna, which will consist of a mast and a communication platform ring. The mast will be protected by a one-of-a-kind fiberglass panel system that will resist wind loading, and create a protected maintenance area.


http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-06-29-freedom-tower_x.htm?csp=34

Childs said the spire, enclosed in a white, fiberglass sheath that a sculptor is helping to create, would make it more visible from a distance and a landmark similar to the spires on the Empire State Building and the Chrysler Building.


The illumination of the spire was also intended to make the spire itself stand out.





Compare the BofA NY to 1 WTC. BofA has been declared to have a spire.

1) Is it an antenna if it cannot broadcast? Like BofA, the "top of the structure" of 1 WTC cannot broadcast anything on its own. Something must be attached to it to do so. Does the BofA spire become an antenna if broadcasting equipment is attached to it? Does it only become an antenna once broadcasting starts?


People often bring up the BofA spire. But the answer is obvious, especially when you consider all you need do is look next door to the antenna of the Conde Nast (4 Times Square) Building, which this antenna closely resembles. Also, the spire of BofA was never intended to be an antenna, it was purely architectural.




http://barbizonlighting.blogspot.com/2012/12/freedom-tower-spire-arrives-in-new-york.html

Freedom Tower spire arrives in New York City

December 12, 2012


Barbizon has been working behind the scenes on a pretty interesting project. The developers of the Freedom Tower were looking to make the lighting for the building's spire as energy efficient as possible. The Barbizon New York systems group worked with the building's designers on a plan that lights both the various levels of the spire, but also the rotating beacon at the very top in an energy efficient manner.

There'll be much more information coming out about this soon, but the excitement at the New York offices are ramping up



J DORAN (http://www.flickr.com/photos/neener109/8273811707/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8502/8273811707_933fb94e06_b.jpg



-Special- (http://www.flickr.com/photos/84851793@N00/8272015156/sizes/l/in/photostream/)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8202/8272015156_fcd7bae0a8_c.jpg



http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8202/8272015156_fcd7bae0a8_b.jpg

[jd3189]

In essence, I don't give a damn anymore. I don't care whether the structure on top of this tower is a spire, antenna, or a large upright piece of feces collected from all the citizens of New York. As long as I can see it and it is connected to the building, it counts towards overall height. I consider the antenna on top of the ESB to be its peak, as well as the two masts that make up the "hat" of the Sears Tower. Of course, the spire was symbolic for 1 WTC, but as long as the internal mast goes up to the same height, I'm happy. I could care less what the CTBUH thinks. Whatever a person thinks is how tall a building is should not be decided by another group of people. You people care too much about what others think and cease to care or even know what you think. I hate to turn this to a psychological debate, but the fact is that there's much ado about nothing in the end. Take it as you want, share your opinions and beliefs, but don't expect much or anything if you want to change people's minds. Because no matter how much you try, you can't change people's minds. Only they can change their perceptions of 1 WTC's mast on whether it's an antenna or a spire. As for me, as long as it dominates Lower Manhattan, as it does now, I am content.

[Inkoumori]

It was made already, but for some reason, Durst refunded the money used to buy it, to save some.

what?:stunned:

[yankeesfan1000]

I don't know if this information is already common knowledge, but there are about a half dozen pieces of the spire sitting on a small barge on West St between Chambers and Harrison if anyone wants to see what they look like.

[QUEENSNYMAN]

FROM: QUEENSNY121

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRytz3iPlOg&feature=youtu.be

Hope you like!

[Otie]

It was made already, but for some reason, Durst refunded the money used to buy it, to save some.


Your statement is wrong, Tishman never published the Request for Proposal for prospect bidders.

Well there was never any doubt that the North Tower's mast was an antenna. It was littered with broadcasting equipment. That's one of the main dfferences with the new 1 WTC's mast. It wont have anything attached to it, that's what the comms ring will be for.

I invite you to read more carefully, the mast was designed specifically for holding broadcast equipment at the upper sections, it WILL eventually look worse than the original mast.


The illumination of the spire was also intended to make the spire itself stand out.


Claude R. Engle was the lighting consultant for the spire.
http://www.crengle.com/images/images_big/freedom_tower_image1.jpg

[nycaddict]

does anyone have any high resolution renderings of what the new antenna will look like at night when lit up and with its beacon?

[jd3189]

Your statement is wrong, Tishman never published the Request for Proposal for prospect bidders.


Thanks, I'll correct it.

[Eidolon]

http://www.crengle.com/images/images_big/freedom_tower_image1.jpg

Call me crazy, but I think that the WTC spire design would look excellent if it was reused as the design for a residential tower about 1,200ft to 2,000ft tall. :whip:

[jd3189]

:previous: You weren't the first one to think of that idea. One guy proposed it should be built in the West side area along with Hudson Yards and other projects.

[Inkoumori]

^lol

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/08/10/1015_tallest_buildings/image/chicago_spire.jpg
http://images.businessweek.com/ss/08/10/1015_tallest_buildings/17.htm:

[-Filipe-]

does anyone have any high resolution renderings of what the new antenna will look like at night when lit up and with its beacon?

i found these two

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/145266216/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/nyguy/image/145266223/original.jpg

[Chapelo]

I love that last Miller-Hare rendering, it looks so much like the North Tower.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8081/8274733185_e94d69d686_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/8379824@N07/8274733185/)
In the Holiday Spirit II (http://www.flickr.com/photos/8379824@N07/8274733185/) by beanhead4529 (http://www.flickr.com/people/8379824@N07/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8349/8276035728_ef79febb31_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/20661491@N04/8276035728/)
DSC02104 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/20661491@N04/8276035728/) by tofedupin (http://www.flickr.com/people/20661491@N04/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8058/8276028384_f17c1dd2a1_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/20661491@N04/8276028384/)
DSC01789 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/20661491@N04/8276028384/) by tofedupin (http://www.flickr.com/people/20661491@N04/), on Flickr

[Empire state of mind]

There's nothing we can do about the spire, just like politics. Accept it and move on, that's life.

[Inkoumori]

"Accept" it.

sorry, a peeve ;)

[SFContributor]

Do we have one more row of regular glass, or will the next row be for the mechanical floors?

[yankeesfan1000]

Little old, but still great shot. Thanks to Derek2k3 on WNY for finding it...

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8077/8252533709_682f2528f9_b.jpg
Shaun Jones LA (http://www.flickr.com/photos/shaunjones/8252533709/sizes/l/in/pool-35034350743@N01/)

[Empire state of mind]

"Accept" it.

sorry, a peeve ;)

No worries, it's the beautiful iOS auto correct.:tup:

[kpdrummer82]

I have a small, slightly off-topic question, I was on One WTC.com and it shows the floor/leasing plan, and I realized that the floor space as ascending is decreasing, can somebody tell me why that is, is it because of the diagonal(spiraling) pattern or what??

[MadGnome]

Well there was never any doubt that the North Tower's mast was an antenna. It was littered with broadcasting equipment. That's one of the main dfferences with the new 1 WTC's mast. It wont have anything attached to it, that's what the comms ring will be for.

No idea where you got that notion, but the mast is for broadcast antennas. The ring will be for local cell networks and point to point systems. Half the purpose of the cladding was to hide the ugly ass antennas.

[MadGnome]

I have a small, slightly off-topic question, I was on One WTC.com and it shows the floor/leasing plan, and I realized that the floor space as ascending is decreasing, can somebody tell me why that is, is it because of the diagonal(spiraling) pattern or what??

The tower is 200 by 200 feet at the bottom and 140 buy 140 feet at the top. It looks straight from directly north/south or east/west because you see the 200 foot side at the bottom but the 200 foot diagonal at the top. From a 45 degree angle it looks tapered because you see the 280 foot diagonal at the bottom and the 140 foot side at the top.

[Nexis4Jersey]

My World Trade Center 1 pictures from Brooklyn

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8203/8270643871_d41bde66e7_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/42178139@N06/8270643871/)
081 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/42178139@N06/8270643871/) by Nexis4Jersey09 (http://www.flickr.com/people/42178139@N06/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8206/8271708366_ac4c75a46f_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/42178139@N06/8271708366/)
104 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/42178139@N06/8271708366/) by Nexis4Jersey09 (http://www.flickr.com/people/42178139@N06/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8502/8270642165_b98904e05f_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/42178139@N06/8270642165/)
116 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/42178139@N06/8270642165/) by Nexis4Jersey09 (http://www.flickr.com/people/42178139@N06/), on Flickr

[DesignerVoodoo]

From Saturday night, photos are mine. http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/1603/img9632aw.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/534/img9632aw.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us) http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/4521/img1953u.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/855/img1953u.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

[Eidolon]

:previous:
Nice pictures!